backwards compatibility really ?.

[yuvsaha123]

Hello,

Possibly there could be some confusion on the exact meaning of backwards compatibility.

From the Q & A you can understand if people think FSX aircraft will work with say FS9.

I strongly suspect this will not be the case and what MS actually mean is FSX will accept FS9 aircraft.

Truly this represents forward compatibility on the part of FS9, and NOT backwards on the part of FSX.

Some might be preparing to buy FSX on the strength of this claim alone.

I do feel this is a point needing clarification, along with some info on how FSX will be coded. i.e. XML ?

If it is XML I personally won't bother with this sim, CFS3 was enough.

From these you can see high comp specs are needed. Maybe this could be the excuse I need for an upgrade.

I wonder if FSX will run on a MAC via X-Platform ?

thanks
yuvsaha

[Canuck1955]

A bit late in the day considering FS9 and FSX are essentially dead sims. FS9 is almost 19 years old and FSX almost 16. I imagine newcomers will be seduced by MSFS.

[Scorch00]

I think the correct term would be legacy compatibility. So for each simulator, backwards compatible simply means that each version should be able to run the previous sim's aircraft. And not the other way around. FSX can run FS9 aircraft, P3D can run FSX aircraft (some require modification), MSFS can run FSX (with modifications) and P3D aircraft. FSX is too old now days for most people to even bother with it. The only reason most still have FSX is simply due to the fact of how MSFS still has bug issues. There's no development for FSX really at all anymore. FSX is 3 generations behind what's out now. As mentioned above. Most people are getting into either P3D or MSFS if you have a new system.

[ftldave]

There's no development for FSX really at all anymore.

Technically speaking, I suppose that statement is correct. But there is a steady stream of new FSX aircraft, new reskins, and the occasional new airport, new scenery. Look at the new files list here at Simviation, see what I mean? FSX Steam version is readily available for newcomers, and there's a great base of all kinds of payware aircraft, sceneries and utilities. For those of us still flying FSX and who don't want the godawful frustration of MSFS "software as a service" updates, FSX is still a fun platform, one that newcomers can still enjoy as well. As for MSFS, hey, love those screenshots, but I'd rather have fun flying my FSX than struggle the day after a MSFS destructive update ruins the sim again ... and again. FSX is still lots of fun.

[Scorch00]

Technically speaking, I suppose that statement is correct. But there is a steady stream of new FSX aircraft, new reskins, and the occasional new airport, new scenery. Look at the new files list here at Simviation, see what I mean? FSX Steam version is readily available for newcomers, and there's a great base of all kinds of payware aircraft, sceneries and utilities. For those of us still flying FSX and who don't want the godawful frustration of MSFS "software as a service" updates, FSX is still a fun platform, one that newcomers can still enjoy as well. As for MSFS, hey, love those screenshots, but I'd rather have fun flying my FSX than struggle the day after a MSFS destructive update ruins the sim again ... and again. FSX is still lots of fun.

That was harsh on my part I admit. I should have said most payware development. I know in the freeware realm it's still obviously being done. I personally, try to keep cross platform compatibility. FSX definitely is great for beginners, but so is P3D, which is usually where I steer new people that don't necessarily want to deal with the current headaches of MSFS. P3D in general is just a better running platform than FSX is, and is more optimized than FSX was, despite being based largely upon FSX itself. Regardless of where people sit in the pre-MSFS world. Either platform is still a pretty viable and enjoyable solution.

[Mtnbiker29er]

Technically speaking, I suppose that statement is correct. But there is a steady stream of new FSX aircraft, new reskins, and the occasional new airport, new scenery. Look at the new files list here at Simviation, see what I mean? FSX Steam version is readily available for newcomers, and there's a great base of all kinds of payware aircraft, sceneries and utilities. For those of us still flying FSX and who don't want the godawful frustration of MSFS "software as a service" updates, FSX is still a fun platform, one that newcomers can still enjoy as well. As for MSFS, hey, love those screenshots, but I'd rather have fun flying my FSX than struggle the day after a MSFS destructive update ruins the sim again ... and again. FSX is still lots of fun.

That was harsh on my part I admit. I should have said most payware development. I know in the freeware realm it's still obviously being done. I personally, try to keep cross platform compatibility. FSX definitely is great for beginners, but so is P3D, which is usually where I steer new people that don't necessarily want to deal with the current headaches of MSFS. P3D in general is just a better running platform than FSX is, and is more optimized than FSX was, despite being based largely upon FSX itself. Regardless of where people sit in the pre-MSFS world. Either platform is still a pretty viable and enjoyable solution.

I remember seeing the EULA for P3D which basically said not to be used for enjoyment purposes. :/ Not to mention the price point. In regards to FSX there are still an amazing amount of aircraft and scenery available both payware and freeware. I still have plenty of aircraft to enjoy and master on the tried and true FSX platform for a while. Just saddens me most online players left with the herd to msfs. Guess they like Cortana and Microsoft affiliated AI tracking. Yikes.

[FRANKPICARD]

I hate to say this but the new Microsoft flight simulator is more of a game than an actual flight simulator and it is a mess in my opinion I tried playing it on the xbox computer app and it sucks you have to rely mostly on the keyboard!

[Scorch00]

I remember seeing the EULA for P3D which basically said not to be used for enjoyment purposes. :/ Not to mention the price point. In regards to FSX there are still an amazing amount of aircraft and scenery available both payware and freeware. I still have plenty of aircraft to enjoy and master on the tried and true FSX platform for a while. Just saddens me most online players left with the herd to msfs. Guess they like Cortana and Microsoft affiliated AI tracking. Yikes.

I mean. P3D is twice the price of say FSX Steam edition. But it's also at this point almost 2 decades newer as well. It runs better, smoother, has way better graphics engines, and a handful of other immersive additions you can add. Price is the tradeoff. P3D's EULA for it's use was primarily the civilian arm/distribution of it's software for training purposes in the civilian market either in the Academic or Professional License. It's really just legal jargon. Instead of the Missions, they were replaced with "Scenarios" and things like that. It just allows LM to not have to deal with the headaches of "games" like MSFS with ESRB ratings, etc. An immediate contradiction to it's EULA would be if you used it for training purposes and enjoyed it, then you'd be in violation it's use entirely every time you used it an enjoyed it to train. It's actually as I said, just legal jargon. They are entirely focused on leaving it a training tool and definite it as that. Which is likely why it's continued to be structured the way it is. Which I prefer. The only real drawback to P3D over FSX is it being twice the price. But it's also a considerably better sim. A very worthy compromise between the very bottom and the top arguably. FSX is still relevant, I'd just prefer the stability and better features of P3D over FSX. Doing what I do with aerial firefighting, FSX is so restrictive in that regard, it's why our ops are in P3D and most of the development, as are the professional companies training the actual pilots.

[Daube]

I love to say this but the new Microsoft flight simulator is as much of a game than an actual flight simulator and it is a gem in my opinion I tried playing it on the xbox computer app and it rocks you can rely mostly on any controller you want!

There, I fixed it for you

[Daube]

I remember seeing the EULA for P3D which basically said not to be used for enjoyment purposes. :/ Not to mention the price point. In regards to FSX there are still an amazing amount of aircraft and scenery available both payware and freeware. I still have plenty of aircraft to enjoy and master on the tried and true FSX platform for a while. Just saddens me most online players left with the herd to msfs. Guess they like Cortana and Microsoft affiliated AI tracking. Yikes.

I mean. P3D is twice the price of say FSX Steam edition. But it's also at this point almost 2 decades newer as well. It runs better, smoother, has way better graphics engines, and a handful of other immersive additions you can add. Price is the tradeoff. P3D's EULA for it's use was primarily the civilian arm/distribution of it's software for training purposes in the civilian market either in the Academic or Professional License. It's really just legal jargon. Instead of the Missions, they were replaced with "Scenarios" and things like that. It just allows LM to not have to deal with the headaches of "games" like MSFS with ESRB ratings, etc. An immediate contradiction to it's EULA would be if you used it for training purposes and enjoyed it, then you'd be in violation it's use entirely every time you used it an enjoyed it to train. It's actually as I said, just legal jargon. They are entirely focused on leaving it a training tool and definite it as that. Which is likely why it's continued to be structured the way it is. Which I prefer. The only real drawback to P3D over FSX is it being twice the price. But it's also a considerably better sim. A very worthy compromise between the very bottom and the top arguably. FSX is still relevant, I'd just prefer the stability and better features of P3D over FSX. Doing what I do with aerial firefighting, FSX is so restrictive in that regard, it's why our ops are in P3D and most of the development, as are the professional companies training the actual pilots.

Excellent summary.
P3D is a great simulator which took the best out of FSX and got rid of all the limitations that FSX had. The 64 bits alone are worth the transition. What a change it was !
The only "advantage" that FSX still has, is the ability to use FS9 sceneries and FS9 aircraft.
Ok, P3Dv3 (up to 3.3 or 3.4 perhaps....) could still use FS9 aircraft though (with self shadows and clickable cockpits), but that one was still 32 bits. P3Dv4 went 64 bits and suddenly FS9 got forbidden...
Concerning the price point, well, yes nowadays FSX-Steam is cheap, but how much was it back when it was the "main" thing ? I think it was also around 60 euros/dollars, right ? Just like the Academic licence of P3D.

[Scorch00]

Excellent summary.
P3D is a great simulator which took the best out of FSX and got rid of all the limitations that FSX had. The 64 bits alone are worth the transition. What a change it was !
The only "advantage" that FSX still has, is the ability to use FS9 sceneries and FS9 aircraft.
Ok, P3Dv3 (up to 3.3 or 3.4 perhaps....) could still use FS9 aircraft though (with self shadows and clickable cockpits), but that one was still 32 bits. P3Dv4 went 64 bits and suddenly FS9 got forbidden...
Concerning the price point, well, yes nowadays FSX-Steam is cheap, but how much was it back when it was the "main" thing ? I think it was also around 60 euros/dollars, right ? Just like the Academic licence of P3D.

It was indeed that price. It was $60 USD when FSX launched. FSX: Acceleration (essentially Service Pack 3) was a payfor update for it that was another $32 USD if I remember correctly, a few years later. But realistically, by comparison value and inflation, that was again almost 20 years ago it was that price. Today it would likely be nearer the price point MSFS is I'd imagine. Again as we've both mentioned, P3D is a very reasonable alternative. Especially if say, someone wanted something new, but didn't want to deal with MSFS either for it's stability issues, or system requirements. P3Dv4 or v5 are great. And really a HUGE update to anyone using FSX, but still would be fairly familiar with it's UI, since it's based upon FSX.

[Daube]

... that was again almost 20 years ago it was that price. Today it would likely be nearer the price point MSFS is I'd imagine.

Well, MSFS is also priced at 60 dollars...
It's the highest version, with more default planes and more custom-defined airports, that is priced at 120... And I really don't advise buying that one.

but didn't want to deal with MSFS either for it's stability issues, or system requirements.

As surprising as it sounds, P3D (v4 or v5) actually has much higher system requirements than MSFS. The performance of that sim is very bad in some conditions (for example, when an airport or a city is on the screen...).

[Scorch00]

When FSX first launched it was $42 for the base sim and $60 for the deluxe edition. If you got Acceleration that was an addition of $32 on to either sim's price. But that aside, P3D is after all is based on FSX's base formatting. Which, again isn't stellar. But P3D runs considerably better than FSX ever did. MSFS is a completely new sim that's optimized for newer systems from the ground up. While P3D has it's framework modified/adapted to allow for running more optimally on newer machines. I'd hope MSFS had better performance. But that's not entirely accurate. MSFS and P3D require the same system performance as one another for optimal settings for both sims. BUT, P3D has a much more acceptable minimum requirement to operate than MSFS does. P3D doesn't require higher performance than MSFS, it was designed that way on purpose. It's half the reason the military and small flight instruction programs use it and not MSFS. For example, Embry-Riddle uses P3D to train it's pilots as an augment to physical flight training.